Judicial practice in road accidents (causing minor or moderate harm to the health of the victim). The theory of everything How to get a fine instead of deprivation according to 12.24

ST 12.24 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

1. Violation of the Rules traffic or operating rules vehicle, which entailed causing lung harm to the health of the victim, -

entails imposition administrative fine in the amount of two thousand five hundred to five thousand rubles or deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a period of one to one and a half years.

2. Violation of traffic rules or rules of operation of a vehicle, resulting in the infliction of moderate harm to the health of the victim, -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine in the amount of ten thousand to twenty-five thousand rubles or deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a period of one and a half to two years.

Notes:

1. Under causing slight harm health should be understood as a short-term health disorder or a minor permanent loss of general ability to work.

2. Infliction of moderate harm to health should be understood as a long-term health disorder that is not life-threatening or a significant permanent loss of general working capacity of less than one third

Commentary to Art. 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

3. From the subjective side, the offenses in question are characterized by a careless form of guilt.

4. Protocols on the administrative offenses under comment are drawn up by officials of the internal affairs bodies (police) (Part 1 of Article 28.3 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

5. Cases of administrative offenses provided for in the commented article are considered by a judge (Part 1 of Article 23.1 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation).

Article 12.24. Violation of traffic rules or vehicle operating rules, resulting in minor or moderate harm to the health of the victim. Traffic police fine

1. Violation of traffic rules or rules of operation of a vehicle, resulting in minor harm to the health of the victim, -

shall entail the imposition of an administrative fine in the amount of two thousand five hundred to five thousand rubles or deprivation of the right to drive vehicles for a period of one to one and a half years.

2. Violation of traffic rules or rules of operation of a vehicle, resulting in the infliction of moderate harm to the health of the victim, -

Notes:

1. Minor harm to health should be understood as a short-term health disorder or minor permanent loss of general ability to work.

2. Infliction of moderate harm to health should be understood as a non-life-threatening long-term health disorder or a significant permanent loss of general ability to work by less than one third.

1. Violation of traffic rules or rules of operation of a vehicle, resulting in minor harm to the health of the victim, -

2. Violation of traffic rules or rules of operation of a vehicle, resulting in the infliction of moderate harm to the health of the victim, -

Notes:

1. Minor harm to health should be understood as a short-term health disorder or minor permanent loss of general ability to work.

2. Infliction of moderate harm to health should be understood as a non-life-threatening long-term health disorder or a significant permanent loss of general ability to work by less than one third.

Commentary to Art. 12.24 Code of Administrative Offenses

1. The object of this offense is road safety, life and health of citizens.

2. The classification of an offense under this article is carried out if the violation of the Traffic Rules resulted in harm to the health of the victim.

Causing minor harm to health should be understood as a short-term health disorder or a minor permanent loss of general ability to work from six to twenty-one days. If a violation of the rules for operating a vehicle entails consequences in the form of causing serious harm to human health, then the actions are qualified under Art. 264 CC.

Infliction of moderate harm to health should be understood as a non-life-threatening long-term health disorder or a significant permanent loss of general ability to work by less than one third.

3. Subjective side The offense is characterized by guilt in the form of intent and negligence.

4. The subject of this offense is the driver of the vehicle.

Judicial practice under Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses

Determination of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation dated February 27, 2018 N 539-O

1. In his complaint to Constitutional Court Russian Federation citizen N.A. Mashkova challenges the constitutionality of Part 2 of Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, which provides for administrative liability for violation of the Traffic Rules or the rules of operation of a vehicle, resulting in the infliction of moderate harm to the health of the victim.

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated February 12, 2018 N 38-AD18-1

Judge Supreme Court of the Russian Federation S.B. Nikiforov, having considered the complaint of Andrey Ivanovich Dementyev against those who entered into legal force Resolution of the judge of the Leninsky District Court of the Tula Region dated June 29, 2015, decision of Judge Tulsky regional court dated September 23, 2015 and the resolution of the Deputy Chairman of the Tula Regional Court dated March 09, 2016, issued against Andrey Ivanovich Dementyev (hereinafter referred to as A.I. Dementyev) in the case of an administrative offense under Part 2 of Article 12.24

Decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated April 26, 2018 N 14-AAD18-1

Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation S.B. Nikiforov, having considered in open court hearing complaint of Mikhail Yuryevich Gritsenko against the ruling of the judge of the Voronezh Regional Court dated November 29, 2016 N 7-220, issued in the case of an administrative offense provided for in Part 2 of Article 12.24 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, in relation to Mikhail Yuryevich Gritsenko (hereinafter - M. Yu. Gritsenko .)

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated 04/05/2018 N 85-AD18-3

Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation S.B. Nikiforov, having considered the complaint of defender V.V. Kondaleev, acting in the interests of Oleg Ergashovich Khaidarov, against the decision of the judge of the Kirovsky District Court of the Kaluga Region dated February 7, 2017, the decision of the judge of the Kaluga Regional Court, which entered into legal force dated April 4, 2017 and the resolution of the Deputy Chairman of the Kaluga Regional Court dated August 7, 2017, issued against Oleg Ergashovich Khaidarov (hereinafter referred to as O.E. Khaidarov) in the case of administrative offenses provided for in parts 1, 2 of Article 12.24 of the Code of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses,

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 18, 2018 N 82-AD18-2

Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation S.B. Nikiforov, having considered the complaint of defender A.V. Korshunov, acting on the basis of a warrant in the interests of S.L. Khan. on the decision of the judge of the Kurgan City Court that has entered into legal force Kurgan region dated December 02, 2016, the decision of the judge of the Kurgan Regional Court dated January 26, 2017 and the resolution of the Chairman of the Kurgan Regional Court dated May 05, 2017, issued against Sergey Lvovich Khan in the case of an administrative offense under Part 1 of Article 12.24 of the Administrative Code of the Russian Federation offenses,

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated May 10, 2018 N 19-AD18-10

Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation Nikiforov S.B., having considered the complaint of Savilo A.N. on the decision of the judge of the Industrial District Court of Stavropol dated February 14, 2017, the decision of judge Stavropolsky, which entered into legal force regional court dated May 17, 2017 and the resolution of the Deputy Chairman of the Stavropol Regional Court dated December 6, 2017, issued against Aleksey Nikolaevich Savilo in the case of an administrative offense under Part 2 of Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation,

Decision of the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated June 25, 2018 N DK18-36

In support of the submission, the chairman of the regional court indicated that Gudkin A.A., while managing alcohol intoxication a BMW X3, drove into oncoming traffic and collided with a KIA Sportage car driven by N.A. Kazaryan, whose passenger was injured, after which he replaced the state registration plate on his car and refused to undergo an intoxication test. In relation to Gudkin A.A. cases of administrative offenses under Part 1 of Art. 12.24, part 4 art. 12.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, and protocols on administrative offenses were drawn up under Part 2 of Art. 12.37, part 4 art. 12.15, part 1 art. 12.26 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

Appeal ruling of the Judicial Collegium for Administrative Cases of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated July 18, 2018 N 41-APG18-8

considered in open court an administrative case on appeal Gudkin Alexander Anatolyevich on the conclusion of the judicial panel of the Rostov Regional Court dated March 16, 2018, which satisfied the submission Prosecutor General Russian Federation on giving consent to involve administrative responsibility, provided for in Part 1 of Article 12.24 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses, judge of the Azov City Court of the Rostov Region Gudkina A.A.

Decision of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated July 30, 2018 N 81-AAD18-7

Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.P. Merkulov, having considered in open court the complaint of Galina Anatolyevna Zolotukhina against the ruling of the judge of the Kemerovo Regional Court dated June 6, 2018 to reject the petition for the restoration of the missed procedural period an appeal issued in a case of an administrative offense provided for in Part 1 of Article 12.24 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses in relation to Galina Anatolyevna Zolotukhina,

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 20, 2018 N 44-AD18-13

Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.P. Merkulov, having considered the complaint of L.P. Safina. on the decision of the judge of the Berezniki City Court that has entered into legal force Perm region dated June 22, 2017, the decision of the judge of the Perm Regional Court dated August 9, 2017 and the resolution of the Deputy Chairman of the Perm Regional Court dated October 10, 2017, issued against Larisa Petrovna Safina in the case of an administrative offense provided for in Part 2 of Article 12.24 of the Code of the Russian Federation on administrative offenses,

Resolution of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation dated August 10, 2018 N 25-AD18-10

Judge of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation V.P. Merkulov, having considered the complaint of Vasily Mikhailovich Panurov against the decision of the judge of the Sovetsky District Court of Astrakhan dated October 25, 2017, the decision of the judge of the Astrakhan Regional Court dated November 17, 2017 and the decision of the Deputy Chairman of the Astrakhan Regional Court dated 12 March 2018, issued against Vasily Mikhailovich Panurov (hereinafter referred to as V.M. Panurov) in the case of an administrative offense under Part 1 of Article 12.24 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offences,

If, as a result of a traffic accident, harm is caused to the health of the victim, then the driver responsible for the accident is brought to administrative liability in the form of deprivation driver's license for a period of up to two years.

Also, it's ok civil proceedings, a claim may be brought against him for compensation for damage caused to health.

However, in some cases, despite the occurrence of a traffic accident, the driver can achieve termination administrative proceedings under Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Responsibility of the Russian Federation. And accordingly, he will not be deprived of his rights to drive vehicles.

Such a development of events is possible in the following cases, in which rights are not deprived:

there is no substance in the actions of the driver of the vehicle administrative offense provided for in Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation;
The punishment for violating the traffic rules provided for in Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses was applied to a minimum. That is, instead of being deprived of a driver’s license, the driver will be subject to an administrative fine.

If a traffic accident occurs causing bodily harm victim, it is often difficult to determine at the scene of the accident who is right and who is to blame for the accident.

This is explained by the fact that the vehicles could be moving at high speed before the collision, and after the collision they were far from the point of impact.

Traveled to accident scene Police officers, including traffic police officers, as well as the ambulance crew, cannot say on the spot what severity of injuries the victims received.

In this regard, the actions of vehicle drivers initially in automatic mode fall under Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation.

The traffic police service is conducting an administrative investigation in order to clarify all the circumstances of the traffic accident that resulted in bodily harm to the victims, as well as to establish the fact which of the vehicle drivers violated the traffic rules that led to the accident.

During the administrative investigation, every driver of a vehicle involved in a traffic accident has the right to use the services of a lawyer and file petitions:

on carrying out certain actions aimed at establishing all the circumstances of the accident;
on interviewing eyewitnesses and witnesses to a traffic accident;
confiscation of video recorders from cars that were involved in road accidents;
inclusion of recordings from vehicle video recorders that recorded the moment of the accident;
calling an auto technical expert to the scene of an accident;
as well as other requests at his discretion.

The activity of the driver’s position during the investigation of the circumstances of the road accident determines whether he will be found guilty of the accident or whether the guilt of other participants in the incident will be established.

Therefore, there is always a choice: sit at home and wait for the traffic police to call, or realize your legal right for defense by involving an experienced lawyer in the case.

Please keep in mind that every traffic accident is different. Therefore, the driver's actions depend on the specific case. So, for example, if on pedestrian crossing There was a collision with a pedestrian, it would seem that everything is clear.

However, it is necessary to understand, because a situation is possible when a pedestrian crossed the roadway, and therefore the driver could not see him in advance and take measures to brake. That is, the driver did not have the technical ability to avoid a collision.

Therefore, in the event of an accident, it is best to seek the help of a professional lawyer who specializes in the field of forensics, namely in the investigation of road accidents.

According to the sanction of Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, the minimum punishment is an administrative fine.

Therefore, if an administrative case is sent to court, then in order not to be deprived of a driver’s license, you should correctly build your line of behavior during the court hearing.

First of all, the driver must establish contact with the victims, since their opinion often determines what decision the judge will make.

In addition, it is necessary to find mutual understanding with the judge. The driver can be helped with this by his representative, who has legal education and specializes in participation in cases of this category.

With the help of a lawyer, you can draw the court's attention to shortcomings in the materials of the administrative case, which was compiled by traffic police officers, present evidence indicating mitigating circumstances, and ensure adequate behavior of the victim.

In this situation, the court can listen to the position of the representative and decide on punishment in the form of an administrative fine, rather than waste time on a lengthy consideration of the case in court, ordering examinations, calling witnesses, and so on.

Since the norms of articles of administrative legislation are written for general cases, and each traffic accident is individual, there is always a chance to achieve a positive decision based on the results of the trial.

It should be remembered that a positive outcome in court depends on the behavior of the driver when drawing up administrative materials by the traffic police inspector.

The current provision of almost the entire population of the country with technical means capable of producing audio and video recording allows drivers to use this.

This will ensure he is treated politely by traffic police officers and other services, records the actions of the inspector during an administrative investigation, and records the testimony of eyewitnesses and victims immediately after the accident.

In the future, audio and video recordings can be used in court as evidence. You should take a video or photograph of a road sign that is covered by branches, bent or turned in the other direction.

If the driver has photo and video recording equipment with him, then it is necessary to take as many pictures as possible of the location of the vehicles after the traffic accident. Facts that seem insignificant at first glance may later play a role in acquitting the driver.

Everything that the driver or passengers, other persons on his side, recorded using photos and videos can be presented to the court as evidence of the position of the driver of the vehicle who was a participant in the traffic accident.

This can be done either by the driver himself or by his representative, who has the appropriate legal qualifications. It is better to entrust this issue to a lawyer so that he can competently present and argue the information shown in the video files and photographs.

IN otherwise, you can obtain a court decision to revoke your driver’s license to drive vehicles.

And so, with the help of a professional lawyer, the court will be provided with evidence of the driver’s innocence in committing a traffic accident.

In accordance with Article 26.2 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, evidence in a case of an administrative offense is any factual data, on the basis of which a judge, body, executive, in whose proceedings the case is located, establish the presence or absence of an administrative offense event, the guilt of the person brought to administrative responsibility, as well as other circumstances that are important for the correct resolution of the case.

These data are established by the protocol on an administrative offense, other protocols provided for by the Code of Administrative Offenses, explanations of the person against whom proceedings are being conducted for an administrative offense, testimony of the victim, witnesses, expert opinions, other documents, as well as testimony of special technical means, material evidence.

The use of evidence obtained in violation of the law is not permitted. Thus, the driver of a vehicle who is brought to administrative responsibility for a traffic accident, guided by this article, has the right to present to the court any evidence that he deems necessary for an objective consideration of the case.

That is, active protection when administrative investigation the traffic police service, when considering a case in court, will allow the driver to achieve justice and confirm his point of view on the event.

For this purpose, photographs and video recordings from the scene of the incident are suitable, which can confirm that entering the lane of oncoming traffic was forced due to congestion or obstacles in the lane in the form of technical vehicles performing repair or other work.

Data on the state license plates of the specified vehicles and passport data of eyewitnesses to the incident will help.

If the blame is placed on exceeding the speed limit, which resulted in a traffic accident, passengers of the car should be invited as witnesses who can confirm that speed mode was not violated.

If the driver agrees that he actually committed a violation of the Traffic Rules, then the court should be provided with data that will prove the presence of mitigating circumstances. This may include providing material and other assistance to the victim.

If the violation of the Traffic Rules was preceded by some kind of conflict or other incident, then such behavior can be justified by a state of passion by presenting appropriate evidence.

If a driver is caught driving a vehicle while intoxicated, then save him from deprivation driver's license Only errors in the preparation of administrative material by the traffic police inspector can occur. If everything is done correctly, then except for admitting your guilt and repentance, nothing else will affect the judge’s decision.

Thus, each violation of the Traffic Rules is individual, and it is impossible to give recommendations for all occasions. However, it can be argued that the decision about what punishment will be applied to the driver depends, first of all, on himself.

What else should you know?

If there is not enough evidence to support your point of view about the incident, then you can use the following articles of the Code of Administrative Offenses RF:

5, which guarantees the presumption of innocence: a person is subject to administrative liability only for those administrative offenses for which his guilt has been established. A person against whom proceedings are being conducted for an administrative offense is considered innocent until his guilt is proven in the manner prescribed by law. provided for by the Code of Administrative Offenses, and is established by a decision of the judge, body, or official that has considered the case that has entered into legal force. A person brought to administrative responsibility is not required to prove his innocence. Irremovable doubts about the guilt of a person brought to administrative responsibility are interpreted in favor of this person;

7, which provides for actions in the state emergency: actions taken to eliminate a danger that directly threatens the person and rights of this person or other persons, as well as the legally protected interests of society or the state, if this danger could not be eliminated by other means and if the harm caused is less significant than the harm prevented;
8, which implies exemption from liability due to insanity;
9, providing for the possibility of exemption from administrative liability due to the insignificance of the administrative offense;
8, which regulates the procedure for deprivation of special rights;
1, setting general rules imposition of administrative punishment.

Thus, only legally sound explanations with reference to the current norm of administrative legislation will help the driver avoid the maximum penalty.

If this rule do not comply, then any explanations, oral or written, will only aggravate the guilt and deprivation of rights will be ensured.

The principle of defending your position should be as follows:

if the penalty involves solely deprivation of rights, you must prove your innocence;
if there is an alternative punishment - deprivation of rights or a fine, then it is necessary to provide mitigating evidence in order to receive a fine if it is impossible to prove innocence.

It should be borne in mind that the choice of punishment is the subjective opinion of the judge, and the degree of punishment depends on the circumstances, what impression will be made on him by the person brought to administrative responsibility.

As mitigating circumstances, you should use those listed in Article 4.2. Code of Administrative Offenses:

sincere repentance for the offense committed;
voluntary communication to law enforcement agencies about committing an administrative offense;
taking measures to prevent the onset of harmful consequences as a result of an administrative offense;
voluntary compensation for damage caused or harm to the victim, elimination negative consequences resulting from an offense;
committing an administrative offense in a state of strong emotional excitement, the so-called passion, or as a result of a combination of difficult personal or family circumstances;
commission of an offense falling under the provisions of the Code of Administrative Offenses by a person under 14 years of age;
commission of an offense by a woman who is pregnant or has a young child.

This article does not contain an exhaustive list of circumstances that are recognized by law as mitigating. Depending on the specific administrative case, a judge or other authorized official may recognize other circumstances that are not specified in administrative legislation as mitigating guilt.

Procedure for withdrawing a driver's license

Current administrative legislation does not provide for the confiscation of a driver’s license at the scene of a traffic violation.

The decision to deprive a person who is found guilty of an administrative offense is made only by the court. And until the court makes a decision and the ruling comes into force, you can continue to drive vehicles.

If the materials of the administrative case do not contain sufficient evidence of the driver’s guilt in violating the Traffic Rules, then, at the request of representatives of the traffic police, the consideration of the case may be postponed. As evidenced arbitrage practice, usually the break until the next meeting is a week.

If the court has decided to deprive the driver of the right to drive vehicles, then this decision can be appealed to appeal procedure within ten days from the date of the court's decision.

However, to prove that you are right appellate court much more difficult than in the court of first instance.

Therefore, you should make every effort to prove your innocence during the initial consideration of the case. If possible, it is necessary to seek to postpone the consideration of the case to a later date. Such a petition can be explained by the need for a certain time to provide new evidence.

Article 4.5 of the Code of Administrative Offenses determines that “a decision in a case of an administrative offense cannot be made after two months from the date of the commission of the administrative offense.”

Therefore, if it is possible to delay making a decision on administrative matter for a period of more than two months, it will no longer be possible to prosecute.

Liability for average harm to health in an accident

If, as a result of a traffic accident, the victim suffered minor bodily injuries, resulting in a short-term impairment of health or a short-term loss of ability to work, then the driver, in accordance with Part 2 of Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation, will be subject to a fine in the amount of 2,500 to 5,000 rubles or he may be deprived of his driver's license for a period of one to one and a half years.

How is the average harm to health determined in an accident?

In order to determine the severity of the injuries caused to the victim, it is necessary to carry out forensic medical examination.

It should be borne in mind that harm to the health of the victim means a violation of the integrity of human tissues or organs, various violations of the functional state of limbs or organs.

This also includes diseases or other pathological conditions, which are caused by those applied to result of an accident bodily harm.

A forensic medical examination is carried out on the basis of an appropriate decision of the investigator, inquiry officer or court order.

If a criminal case has not been initiated regarding the traffic accident, then the conclusion of a forensic expert can be obtained on the basis of a written order to conduct a forensic medical examination of the victim.

The procedure for conducting a forensic medical examination and conducting a forensic medical examination are no different. Only as a result of the examination will a forensic medical examination report be issued, and as a result of the examination - a medical examination report.

According to legal significance expert opinion has the force of evidence, while the inspection report is informative. However, if no one doubts that the victim suffered minor bodily injuries, then the examination report is sufficient to consider the administrative case.

The following medical criteria will indicate that the victim has suffered moderate bodily injury:

temporary dysfunction of organs, causing temporary disability lasting more than 21 days, that is, long-term health disorder;
significant persistent loss of total working capacity of less than one third;
persistent loss of general ability to work from 10 to 30 percent inclusive.

New edition of Art. 12.24 Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

1. Violation of traffic rules or rules of operation of a vehicle, resulting in minor harm to the health of the victim, -

2. Violation of traffic rules or rules of operation of a vehicle, resulting in the infliction of moderate harm to the health of the victim, -

Notes:

1. Minor harm to health should be understood as a short-term health disorder or minor permanent loss of general ability to work.

2. Infliction of moderate harm to health should be understood as a non-life-threatening long-term health disorder or a significant permanent loss of general ability to work by less than one third.

Commentary on Article 12.24 of the Code of Administrative Offenses of the Russian Federation

1. The object of this offense is road safety, life and health of citizens.

2. The classification of an offense under this article is carried out if the violation of the Traffic Rules resulted in harm to the health of the victim.

Infliction of moderate harm to health should be understood as a non-life-threatening long-term health disorder or a significant permanent loss of general ability to work by less than one third.

3. The subjective side of the offense is characterized by guilt in the form of intent and negligence.

4. The subject of this offense is the driver of the vehicle.

Another comment on Art. 12.24 of the Code of the Russian Federation on Administrative Offenses

1. The object of the administrative offense provided for in Article 12.24 is road safety, life and health of citizens, traffic rules or vehicle operating rules.

2. C objective side the offense is characterized illegal act(inaction) and is expressed in: violation of traffic rules; violation of the rules for operating a vehicle.

The commented norm is a blanket one. It refers to the Rules of the Road and the rules for operating a vehicle. When bringing the perpetrator to administrative responsibility, in each case it is necessary to establish which specific rule was violated.

According to the legal structure, an offense constitutes material composition. The offense is classified under Article 12.24 if the violation of the Traffic Rules or the operation of a vehicle resulted in minor harm to the health of the victim.

Minor harm to health is understood to mean harm to health that caused a short-term health disorder or a minor permanent loss of general ability to work from six to twenty-one days.

The offense is qualified under this article if the victim is the driver of another vehicle. In other cases, bringing the perpetrator to administrative responsibility is carried out under Part 2 of Article 12.30 of this Code.

If a violation of the rules for operating a vehicle entails consequences in the form of causing serious or moderate harm to human health, then the actions are qualified under Article 264 of the Criminal Code.

The offense according to the legal structure is material and is considered completed from the moment the specified consequences occur.

The subjective side of the offense is characterized by guilt in the form of both intent and negligence.

It can be committed either through thoughtlessness or negligence. In case of frivolity, a person, violating the rules of operation of transport, foresees the possibility of causing minor bodily harm or material damage, but without sufficient grounds, arrogantly hopes to prevent these consequences. In case of negligence, a person does not foresee the possibility of the occurrence of these consequences, although with the necessary care and forethought he should and could have foreseen them.